Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback (Patch 9) On identity and whether it's even worth having in its existing form

I can’t answer for Zozo, but I know the general answer to that; the feature uses partisan language. It’s harmless in that no cats are killed, but for some its language of a narrative they don't agree with. And if you sincerely don’t agree, playing along to keep the peace is yet more compromising.

Moving this thought to entertainment, there’s a far greater sin; boring failure. When favorite movies bomb, somehow elements of activism seem to be involved, fairly or not. Regardless, by now it’s considered a huge red flag that what should be fun experience somehow becomes boring preaching. So when Larien hoisted the red flag there was a collective groan, ‘not BG3 too!’

DND HaT isn’t doing itself any favors making Chris Pine’s character physically less competent than the female barbarian. What was an inverted trope 10 years ago is now borderline cliche. Shrek2 was once fresh, not anymore.

I can't believe I'm actually going to make this argument, but...

Most cases of people defending the normativity of a rigid gender binary are based on appeals to the notion of "scientific" referents (i.e., sexual dimorphism... i.e., chromosomes or genitalia or hormones). The line of thinking goes that:
-Excluding parthenogenesis, the overwhelming majority of vertebrates reproduce sexually, and heterosexually at that.
-As part of this sexual reproduction, there are two different type-members of species, male and female, who carry on the existence of said species.
-At birth, these types have specific features that develop further and accentuate the typology later on in life.
-These accentuated features of typology convey normative biological and social roles, man and woman.
-Therefore, the gender binary is real and binding. (Though not universal, as there are exceptions; however, this model is the most common).

Regardless of whether or not you believe the line of thinking above, it does not make sense for the fantasy world in Faerun, in which there are multiple SAPIENT species/races/entities that do not reproduce sexually, do not display dimorphism, and do not have accentuated dimorphic roles later in life. Even if you think gender-nonconformity shouldn't be a thing in real life, the basis for that argument (outside of religion) would support the notion that gender-nonconformity would be a very prominent thing in Faerun, especially for asexual/amorphous races/species/cultures/entities/societies. I would argue that there are some situations in Faerun where gender-nonconformity might be unavoidable, and what we might consider normatively as gender-nonconforming might be conforming from the perspective of the other individual.

(I can't believe I'm making this argument because I'm not even politically aligned with the "left" on most issues for the most part, and yet I find myself being an ardent defender of this feature)

Alien githyanki reproduction is going to feature in Act2 of BG3, so there's that to look forward to. Their eggs magically mature outside the body in a creche, so physical differences between their sexes might be minimal? Lae'zel is as aggressive as a human male warrior, though how much of that is individual we don't know. Guess we'll find out at the creche, if we meet more githyanki females.

This is a good example of alien reproduction in fantasy done right. The plot drives us naturally to this location, and existing githyanki lore tells us they need to prepare sanctuaries in the prime material world for birthing. Normally I'd raise an eyebrow at a location between BG and Elturel, but there are likely places free from traffic around Moonrise, given its curse.

I’m not quite sure if this was a request for moderation guidance on this point? As I’ve said, I’m trying to recuse myself from actually further talking about what I personally think, to avoid muddying the waters.

As a moderator, no there is no expectation that people will lie, or that everyone will (pretend to) agree that they think including gender identity options in BG3 is okay when they don’t.

But yes, there is an expectation that they will moderate their language and try to avoid insulting other forum members to “keep the peace” and leave thinking about “the enemy” at the door when coming here to discuss Larian games with a diverse group of other gamers. These forums are not an appropriate theatre in which to fight the culture war, on any side, and I would recommend finding a different place to vent and avoiding controversial topics here to anyone who is not capable of gaining enough distance from that sort of oppositional thinking to be able to constructively engage with people they see as on the other side. And to consider using the alternative means Larian provide of giving their views on the game (eg the feedback form on the launcher) if they don’t feel able to adjust their articulation in line with expected netiquette.

It is true that some preferences about BG3 features might be inextricably be tied up with negative views folk have about other people and perspectives, and therefore it will be hard to express them without offence or insult. And in that case, as long as the person expressing that preference is at least obviously trying to do so diplomatically (which for me includes not wandering off into politics more than essential to make one’s point about the game), then I’d hope that however uncomfortable that viewpoint makes other forum readers, they would nevertheless respect the right of the poster to hold and express it. Though of course those other forum members are also free to express their disagreement or discomfort, if they feel they are able to do so constructively, or to report the post or PM moderators if not.

I do feel I’m spending more time trying to help folk understand what constructive debate on this admittedly potentially emotive topic looks like than people are actually spending discussing it, so I will now stop doing that unless anyone specifically asks for moderator guidance or crosses the line.

Gender non-conformity =/= rejecting the gender binary, though. The whole point of non-conformity is accepting that interests, fashion sense, behaviourial patterns and types of sexual attraction aren't hard-coded to be rigidly masculine or feminine. Heck, what is considered masculine and feminine greatly differed between cultures and eras, with the modern rigidity being an aberration more than anything.

The idea is that one liberates themselves from the coding of how a man or a woman "should" behave under social pressure and just does whatever they want rather than conform to the notion that their non-conformity must mean they aren't the gender they are. At least, that's how I view it - hence my sometimes bitter remarks regarding the "accepted" perception of the concept that I caught a warning or two for (perhaps deservedly).

Somebody like beholders being hermaphrodites (male-identifying ones, though, apart from the hive mothers?) doesn't exactly serve as a justification for the more "traditional" humanoid races to base their forays into gender identity on. Although, I may have just given somebody an AU/character idea, so there goes that logic.

What you're saying is true that the two things aren't inherently inclusive from person to person, but from a broader, cultural sense they very much are linked quite inherently. Because in a world where gender non-conformity is the norm, then the gender binary as a concept would be negligibly impactful. I think that in a world where the commonly understood trappings of gender are accepted as just that, trappings, with no significance beyond aesthetics, then gender as a societal construct would be far less of a thing that people think and worry about. Which would mean that things like being trans would probably look different to our understandings. The gender binary as it exists today, I don't think can be separated from the rigid ideas of masculinity and femininity that society enforces. Because it IS a societal construct, and that aspect ofit is more impactful than any medical or scientific aspects. And trans identity as it exists today is deeply tied to the gender binary because at least in the west, the gender binary is enforced at pretty much every level. From childhood with toys and books, habits and patterns of behavior, colors and patterns, people are raised with strict expectations of gender thrust upon them from the word go. So of course when someone feels that their body is not the right body, they'll start by leaning into societal signifiers of the opposing gender because society so rigidly states that it's an either-or question. It's a complex question that I'm not fully qualified to talk about really, I lack both the academic depth and the lived experience to comfortably get everything across, and even now I'm actually holding back some stuff because I don't want to get too deep into this topic since now I'm veering away from the question of its value in the game itself.

Returning to the topic of the game then, I have thoughts on the place of gender identity, trans people, etc in the setting. D&D is different from things like say, the Witcher or Dragon Age (although dragon age also acknowledges the existence of trans characters) in that the setting was, from the beginning, made to be interacted with. It was always made with the intention of having players step into it. It's by nature, incomplete, waiting for the players to complete it with their own characters and stories. As such, there's a degree of oppenness inherent to the setting. It's not an enclosed world purely built upon the writer's imagination, there isn't even one writer, there have been countless through the decades. It constantly is evolving and changing. On top of that, Wizards of the Coast has made the conscious choice to push D&D as the quintessential ttrpg, the default, a choice that very clearly is working for them. They until quite recently welcomed players and fans to create their own content, to do things with the game that they couldn't or wouldn't or maybe eventually would in a different way. Now more than ever, D&D is about the interaction of what already exists and what its fans and players bring into it. So I think that given that outside context, it's not only reasonable and justifiable, but also in a way proper for the game's setting to include as diverse a selection of peoples as it can. Because the creators are already saying everyone is welcome, everyone can play. I think actively making room for lots of different types of people is important in that light.

The human brain is rather silly. If you lack an attachment to the gender binary, you may feel the way I did from a young age... all gender is drag.

Even so, the human brain appears to rejoice in that drag. It affirms its self perception. All the more, does the default human appear like an exotic species to someone without that coding. A bird of paradise flapping its colorful wings. For what? Does it like the mirror so much?

What I'm getting at, is that nonconformity from within -- or sourced from society -- are not particularly alike.

There's the woman, who feels acting "masculine" makes her no less "feminine", and the woman who feels like performing feminity exists for audiences.

One is a woman, so everything she does is something a woman would do. The other, quite possibly sees "woman" as an arbitrary assignment. Likes playing make believe, anyway.

It's due time to rein it in, and by that a lot. If it's strictly relevant to BG3, is one thing. A significant portion of this thread, is not.

This is not the place for abstract political/social-political topics, the point is precisely the opposite - a place where who you are doesn't matter (at all) and everyone is just as welcome. Just gamers, enjoying gaming and talking about nerdy stuff.

Beyond that, please re-consider if it's worth. Continuation of the off-topic political nature in any sense at all going forward that isn't strictly and without deviation related to BG3, will cause the thread to be locked and may result in further acts of moderation per user account and at our discretion.

Keep it cool and fun, who anyone is or why really, really does not matter. Neither does your opinions on it.

Alright. I wanted to share how a different perception of gender non-conformity may lead to different expressions (and beliefs). Despite being AFAB, I've felt like someone impersonating a woman to the world's approval all my life.

No discussing that or how it may play into fantasy species in advance. I felt it's important, but I'm happy to quit this thread to not incite more philosophical musings.

Alienating any individual was not the intention of my contribution to this discussion, but I respect your position on this.

OK, my first try to explain / answering the initial thread headline question was
apperantly too complex, too "loaded" this ll be my second try, lets see how that goes aye?

Onwards to the answer i gave.

No it is absolutely not worth it to have identity options in the character creation, i mena AT ALL

Why? Because the setting we talk here is dark fantasy medieval one, pronouns is the last thing this game needs.

Now, instead of JUST going nay nay here, there is also an opportunity (not that it ll matter not for ppl demanding social media madness)

Instead of making this a main game option, how about you give the players a free mini DLC?

or even better

How about you even make it more complex to explain WHY this kind of addressing is in fearun now hm?
By not only bringing the social media pronouns with the DLC but an according RACE as well? A NEW race.

Don't latch such things on existing concepts and characters / races that always have been (uhhggg) "classic"
This will only lead on the path of destruction, because for ppl dwelling on this kind of insanity, it is never enough.

Several examples have already proven that in the past few years, alongside dying franchises that did bend down to this kind of stuff.
So...
Fine lets have the pronouns for players who want them aye?
Make it a free DLC and even better make a complete new race that uses those pronouns to give it more depth? Aye?
Like dunno... a plant based one, that never thought in categories like HE or SHE? Make this a complete optional DLC
extern from the main Baldurs Gate 3 game and everybody can have their cake and eat it as well.

The way Larian go now, just drives me off, because when seeing this tiny itzy bitzy "addition" in the CC it reminds me of
the sad reality we are in, dragging me out of the game, ruining the mood, so to say.

So yes again, its not worth at all having pronouns in the game at all

Fearun has no social media madness
Fearun needs no social media madness

o7

It’s a pity for everyone else when someone fails to understand, read or comply with moderator requests, and thereby ruins the opportunity for others to constructively debate a topic like this.

However, the previous post clearly violates the above warning from The Composer, and so leaves me with no option but to follow through and lock this thread.

Personally I’m very sorry it has come to this. With good will, open minds and a constructive spirit, I believe there’s great potential for talking about games we love to help us understand and communicate positively with folks with different points of view.

But I think we have reached the end of the line with this particular attempt. Locking thread now.